It is the fourth time in four years that Davis' execution has been scheduled by Georgia officials.

Dear Georgia officials;I'm sure that anyone in a position of power in the Great Lone-Star State will be more than happy to help and advise you on how to handle these sort of cases. Although I do not claim to know any of these Texas officials personally; I can say with a certain amount of confidence that such help will be given freely, cordially and politely. Texas is pretty good at making the world a better place, one inmate at a time.

7
posted on 09/21/2011 10:45:42 AM PDT
by Hodar
( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)

There are enough reasonable doubts as to his actual guilt that this execution should be canceled. Sentenced to death with only a couple of eyewitnesses and several people recanting their testimony; and jurors saying they would have changed their minds if they had all the facts; and even conservative legal professionals arguing for clemency?

This case is exactly why anti-death penalty have an argument; and I am very pro-death penalty.

What is your opinion based on? What you read in the news? Why hasn’t the news reported any of the hard (172 pages worth) evidence they have against him? All you hear is the recanted testimonies but what did the other 2 say? You never hear that.

There are enough reasonable doubts as to his actual guilt that this execution should be canceled.

Agreed - reportedly seven of nine eyewitnesses have recanted their testimony, some saying they were intimidated by police and prosecutors. There is also reportedly no physical evidence tying this guy to the murder. I have no problem with the death sentence when the case is iron-clad. That's not this case. There seems to be a reasonable possibility that this guy is innocent.

IDK the details here but he has had his execution put on hold three times already. Apparently whatever doubts linger are not all that reasonable, since the defense has had ample opportunity to make their case.

This isn't the 1950's, I assume the defendant's case has been well scrutinized. If they're down to trying to use a lie detector test at this late date, I'd say this guy has gotten due process.

It may happen, rarely, that an innocent man is executed. That's why I support the idea of the Innocence Project, to minimize horrible mistakes. I don't think it happens enough to suspend the use of capital punishment, just as I don't think the deaths of civilians in warfare (collateral damage)is good enough a reason to be a pacifist.

You assume the prosecutor was seeking justice rather than just a conviction. Due process is no guarantee of an honest trial.

I base this history and personal experience.

Eyewitness testimony is infamously unreliable. There was no other evidence in this case; no DNA, no physical evidence - NOTHING.

This was a high profile case an it is very possible that the prosecutor wanted a conviction in the case more than he was interested in convicting the right person. After all this time, you think a prosecutor is more interested in admitting there were mistakes than in doing justice?

There are many instances when in the face of undeniable proof of innocence, a prosecutor will still claim he guy was guilty. It happens all the time.

What is ironic about this case is that the sheriff deputy he killed (not allegedly killed) was in hot pursuit of him for shooting a man in the face. The media never mentions the fact that it was undisputed that this thug shot a man in the face just before he killed the sheriff deputy. Tookie Williams will be glad to show you around hell, Troy.

God is a just God but he does have a sense of humor and a ‘hands on’ policy on where one spends the afterlife.

ALL go to heaven and just as they are unpacking, God appears and says

“Say there, yes you fella, you weren’t such a nice person and didn’t honor my name etc, just put your gear back and you will be catching the southbound express. Oh, yes, you won’t need that jacket or long sleeved shirts”.
Have a wonderful day.
Bye.

27
posted on 09/21/2011 11:21:25 AM PDT
by xrmusn
((6/98) If govt involved, the more outlandish a scheme appears, the truer it probably is.)

There was physical evidence. The bullet casing at the scene of the sheriff deputy’s homicide also matched the bullet casing found at the scene of the incident just preceding where he shot a man in the face. I really hope you are not trying to decide this case on your own by simply reading managed media reports of what the supporters are claiming. That is what juries are for. The case has been reviewed 4 times by appellate courts.

How has it been determined that he shot another man in the face? Was a bullet removed from that victim?
Was a bullet removed from the deputy?
Were the bullets matched by forensics? At the very least, the bullets are physical evidence.

32
posted on 09/21/2011 11:35:19 AM PDT
by Wiser now
(Socialism does not eliminate poverty, it guarantees it.)

Have you read the legal opinion on the case? There were not “only a couple of eyewitnesses” - there were nine, I believe. Of the seven (I think) that “recanted”, only ONE (the jailhouse snitch) fully recanted his testimony, but the appeals court noted that his testimony at trial contradicted all of the eyewitness testimony, which was incredibly consistent, so it was obviously false testimony to begin with. The others didn’t actually recant their testimony, or they recanted by affadavit, but then when Davis had a chance to put them forward as witnesses at the evidentiary hearing before the appeals court, he left them sitting in the hall. The appeals court viewed that with great suspicion, as a recantation by affadavit is much more suspect then live testimony. It was DAVIS and his attorney that made that decision not to call them as witnesses, and as the appeals court said in its opinion, that calls into question what they were worried would happen if those witnesses were cross-examined about their supposed recantations.

Overall, after reading the full legal opinion, I have no doubt this guy committed the crime and justice is about to be served. And I speak as someone who was wrongly arrested in my past for a crime I did not commit. I try to give the benefit of the doubt in cases like this.

35
posted on 09/21/2011 11:42:08 AM PDT
by RightFighter
(Now back to my war station.)

My comments are based primarily on the reading of he appellate decisions. If you were to read them, you would see that he appellate courts did not address the alleged facts of the case, but only the procedures. In my, and many other, opinions, the appellate courts failed in their primary role of doing justice and weaseled out of it by giving far too much deference to the trial court.

This guy had lousy representation at trial. If he had a decent lawyer, there never would have ben a conviction in the first place.

Although the murder weapon was not recovered, ballistic evidence presented at trial tied bullets recovered at or near the scene to those at another shooting in which Davis was also charged. Davis was convicted of murder and various lesser charges, including the earlier shooting, and sentenced to death in August 1991. On the evening of August 18, 1989, Davis briefly attended a pool party hosted by a friend. As he left with his friend Darrell Collins, the occupants of a passing car yelled obscenities at them.[6] Michael Cooper, a passenger in the other car, was shot in the face, allegedly by Davis.[7] Davis and Collins continued on, and later met Sylvester "Redd" Coles, who was arguing with a homeless man, Larry Young, over a beer.[6][8] Off-duty policeman Mark MacPhail was working as a security guard at a Burger King restaurant in Savannah, Georgia.[9] MacPhail, age 27, the son of a U.S. Army colonel, was married with a 2-year old daughter and an infant son. He had joined the Savannah Police Department in 1986 following six years of military service as an army ranger. MacPhail had worked for three years as a regular patrol officer and in the summer of 1989 had applied to train as a mounted policeman.[10] At about 1:15 am, seeking to help Young who was being attacked in a nearby parking lot, MacPhail was killed. He had been shot twice, once through the heart and once in the face, without drawing his gun.[6][8][11][12] No physical evidence from the crime was retrieved, apart from the bullets and shell casings, which were determined to have come from a .38-caliber pistol. Witnesses to the shooting agreed that a man in a white shirt had struck Young and then shot MacPhail.[6]

Just bad luck I guess that the guy he shot earlier happened to be with bullets that matched with those used later to shoot the security guard/police officer.

38
posted on 09/21/2011 11:46:26 AM PDT
by throwback
( The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid)

"To hear Mr. Davis tell it, this case involves credible, consistent recantations by seven of nine state witnesses. (Doc. 2 at 5-11.) However, this vastly overstates his evidence. Two of the recanting witnesses neither directly state that they lied at trial nor claim that their previous testimony was coerced. Supra Analysis Parts III.B.i (Antoine Williams), III.B.v (Harriet Murray). Two other recantations were impossible to believe, with a host of intrinsic reasons why their author's recantation could not be trusted, and the recantations were contradicted by credible,live testimony. Id. Parts III.B.iii (Jeffrey Sapp), III.R.iv (Darrell Collins). Two more recantations were intentionally and suspiciously offered in affidavit form rather than as live testimony, blocking any meaningful cross-examination by the state or credibility determination by this Court. Id. Parts III.B.vi (Dorothy Farrell), III.B.vii (Larry Young). Moreover, these affidavit recantations were contradicted by credible, live testimony. While these latter two recantations are not totally valueless, their import is greatly diminished by the suspicious way in which they were offered and the live, contrary testimony. Finally, Kevin McQueen's recantation is credible, but his testimony at trial was patently false, as evidenced by its several inconsistencies with the State's version of the events on the night in question. Id. Part III.Bii (Kevin McQueen). Accordingly, it is hard to believe Mr. McQueen's testimony at trial was important to the conviction, rendering his recantation of limited value. Ultimately, four of Mr. Davis's recantations do not diminish the State's case because a reasonable juror would disregard the recantation, not the earlier testimony; and the three others only minimally diminish the State's case. these affidavit recantations were contradicted by credible, live testimony."

Judge Moore goes on to discuss each supposed "recantation" in great detail.

Everyone needs to understand that you CANNOT rely on the mainstream media to understand the facts in a death penalty case. The MSM has a larger agenda, to abolish the death penalty, so they don't approach these cases honestly.

It's the same with the anti-death penalty bar. To them, the larger goal of eradicating the death penalty is part of implementing social justice and is more important than the narrow truth of the particular case involved. The ends justify the means for them. If some guilty person gets off because of their work, they're okay with that because they are (in their own minds) fighting a larger battle.

They use certain strategies to game the system and then the MSM comes in with slanted stories to mold public perceptions.

One of their strategies is not to take over the defense of someone tried for a capital offense until the appellate stage. That way, they preserve the argument that the defense lawyer at the trial stage was such a drooling moron that it was tantamount to being denied a lawyer at all, and therefore a violation of his rights under the Constitution.

Another trick they use, which was used in the Davis case, is to go interview witnesses and elicit an ex parte affidavit which includes a statement worded in such a way that it can be argued that it contradicts the trial testimony. Then they refuse to put that witness on the stand again (where he can be cross-examined to see if he really meant to change his testimony), even though that witness is available, but try to limit any new evidence only to the dodgy affidavit.

In this case, if you read Judge Moore's order in which he goes through all of the evidence introduced in this case, it is striking how many eyewitnesses there were to the event even though it was late at night in a Burger King parking lot. There was a van full of people at the drive-through including an Air Force Lt. Col. There was a guy driving into the parking lot to start his shift at Burger King. There was the guy who was pistol-whipped in the head by the perp. There was the girlfriend of that guy. There were other people across the street who saw the perp run away. All of these were eyewitnesses who were immediately interviewed by police. The number of these witness statements, their freshness and the consistency of their accounts is striking.

And much of what happened is undisputed by both sides. It is conceded that Davis was one of three black youths who followed a guy with a six-pack of beer into the Burger King parking lot, while one of the black youths was harassing the guy to give them some beer.

The numerous witnesses were interviewed by police immediately after the event and all were unanimous: the taller thinner black youth with a white shirt pistol-whipped the guy and then when a cop came over to investigate, shot the cop dead with multiple gun shots, and then ran away. Many of the witnesses positively ID'd Davis, and the other witnesses said the taller thinner youth in the white shirt shot the guy. There is no question that Davis was the taller and thinner of the three youths, and there were additional witnesses even beyond those who positively ID'd Davis as the shooter who testified what he was wearing that night.

The cop was a six-year vet who had served his country as an army ranger.

Davis' street name was "Rah" which stands for "Rough as Hell." He will be finding out what hell is really like soon enough.

40
posted on 09/21/2011 11:53:27 AM PDT
by Meet the New Boss
(Obama has created more jobs in soup kitchens than anyone since Jimmy Carter)

He was being pursued for shooting him in the face not hitting him with the gun. How else would the prosecutor be able to have the ballistics expert testify that the bullet casing from the pool party shooting matched the bullet casing at the shooting of the police officer. Why would anyone have a motive to shoot this police officer other than the perpetrator he was hotly pursuing.
Physical evidence is helpful in gaining a conviction but a jury can always use deductive logic as to motive and opportunity to reach a beyond a reasonable doubt standard.
Anyone trying to decide this case from media reports interposed by the defendant’s supporters is on a fool’s mission.The jury made the decision and 4 separate appeals courts upheld it.

Although the murder weapon was not recovered, ballistic evidence presented at trial tied bullets recovered at or near the scene to those at another shooting in which Davis was also charged. Davis was convicted of murder and various lesser charges, including the earlier shooting, and was sentenced to death in August 1991.

>> I understand that both former Rep Bob Barr and former FBI Director William Sessions have serious doubts about this one. I trust both men to be level headed and in no way sympathetic to cop-killers. <<

I guess you haven't heard about what happened to Boob Barf after he lost his Congressional seat. He went off the deep end, started associating all sorts of liberal causes (even going to an Al Gore event to "raise awareness" of global warming) and did everything he could to trash conservative Republicans and overturn all the good thing he support in Congress like the Defense of Marriage act.

Today's Bob Barr has virtually NOTHING in common with the common sense conservative Bob Barr that served in Congress (I guess they both strongly support gun rights, that's about it). Bob Barr today IS sympathetic to cop-killers (not to mention terrorists), and is a paid ACLU consultant.

“I understand that both former Rep Bob Barr and former FBI Director William Sessions have serious doubts about this one. I trust both men to be level headed and in no way sympathetic to cop-killers”

From Wilkepedia
“Edgar Smith (born 1934) is an American convicted murderer, who was once on Death Row for the 1957 murder of fifteen-year-old honor student and cheer leader Victoria Ann Zielinski. Vigorously contesting his conviction through the courts and in the media, Smith became a celebrity, and his case was argued in public most notably by William F. Buckley, Jr. He eventually succeeded in winning a retrial and negotiating a reduced sentence. Smith was released only to be incarcerated for a second time for the kidnapping and attempted murder of Lefteriya Ozbun in 1976.”

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.